I current;y pay 130$ per month to my employer for healthcare. Or roughly 1600 bucks a year. Thats cheaper than the fines. I have no dental or vision and everything else about my health insurance is weak, but my employer sucks. So the law for me is a good thing ill be getting more value for my money.

You do know that until Clinton the democrats were hard pressed on oppressing african americans right? It wasn't until Clinton that they realized they'd need the african american vote to have any power and that's when they promoted black rights. Republicans weren't the people behind slavery, it was the opposite during that time. It has nothing to do with being a white nation.

Dont blame Obamacare for the failures of for profit GREED medicine system a la USA. True public healthcare and you pay like 30 dollars co pay for a hospital stay that would cost you 5000 dollars in the USA

Im going to be as blunt as possible. The legal precedent for turning profit in a non-profit is extra-ordinanry. Once a non-profit has demonstrated a trend of growth, they are no longer non-profit. The point of the matter is growth.

In other terms, if you were going to compete with me in business as a non-profit, I would not be all that concerned. The profit in non-profit is essentially just a good year. However, its FAR from being capable of expanding. Therefore the goal was not business but the service. I on the other-hand, priced my services to with a 3 year mark for growth. I am clearly in it for the development and not the singleton service.

Essentially, a non-profit is termed as such for the money variable. As, well, money in a real business is not seen as a green piece of paper that buys stuff. Rather, it is counted as what it actually is. The medium for exchange of services. The more money coming in, the more you can service, the larger you get as an organization. Non-profits do not grow larger. They remain static. There have been many cases of non-profits becoming for profit as their growth started to occur and were forced to make the change (happens in tech and food services often enough).

then the poster using a non-profit insurance company as proof that insurance companies don't make big profits is being intellectually dishonest since the biggest companies (i believe) are the for profit ones

Theron/Bloodwatcher 2013!

Originally Posted by Alsompr

Teasing, misdirection. It's the opposite of a spoiler. People expect one thing? BAM! Another thing happens.

That's true, but at the current rate our medical system will end up like sweden's, Garbagemen will be making 70% of what doctors make give or take a few percent. We're on that socialist path right now.

As opposed to one where government effectively confiscates the resources and efforts of private citizens by forcing them into providing a service under the government's terms? Absolutely.

Guess that's why our left turned around the whole public healthcare system, so it is actually a public healthcare system, but doesn't look like it. Stupid people think it is a private healthcare system, and the right got punched so hard in the face when it was introduced and they didn't even realized it. So smart. We should teach the US sometimes how to properly troll conservative people on public healthcare.

Originally Posted by Fadinglight

That's true, but at the current rate our medical system will end up like sweden's, Garbagemen will be making 70% of what doctors make give or take a few percent. We're on that socialist path right now.

What's so problematic about that? Garbagemen have a heavy influence on public health, ask Italy! (I don't understand that focus on doctors, they are not the only part of healthcare, atleast here they soak up too much money while other parts of the system don't get enough. Yes I'm underpaid imho *rant*)

I recall it was a higher percentage of Republicans that voted for it than democrats. That chart seems to try and hide that or I'm wrong.

It's not hiding it, it's putting into perspective, that it was a vote based on regional differences. Unless you're arguing that racists *didn't* live in the South? You're not wrong, except for the assumption that Democrats voted against the bill.

Why does the US pay more? because companies can charge the US more and they know we'll pay because our system is bullshit

US NIH is the leader in NIH grants for health research. NIH grants are for US organizations. When researchers come off of NIH grants, they're going to start their company in the US, go figure.

On top of that, the FDA is very strict. Pushing a drug through FDA approval takes some 10 to 15 years and costs a billion dollars (roughly). The majority of these costs are paid by US consumers.

Being a bioengineer, I've learned about how FDA approval is a pain in the ass. Instead of going for FDA approval first using a bunch of research subjects (read: human lab rats), companies are releasing their drugs in the more 'lax' EU, letting EU consumers 'beta test' the drug (akin to what Blizzard does with their games).

You can argue how the system is stupid all you want, but it there are cases where the FDA's strict nature have been beneficial. Couple that with the fact that US citizens flip a shit whenever something bad manages to pass through the FDA, you can see why FDA administrators (read: elected or appointed by elected officials) make FDA's policies so stringent.

STOCKHOLM (Reuters) - Emelie is plagued by hallucinations and nightmares. When she wakes up, she's often paralyzed, unable to breathe properly or call for help. During the day she can barely stay awake, and often misses school or having fun with friends. She is only 14, but at times she has wondered if her life is worth living.

Emelie is one of around 800 children in Sweden and elsewhere in Europe who developed narcolepsy, an incurable sleep disorder, after being immunized with the Pandemrix H1N1 swine flu vaccine made by British drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline in 2009.

...

In total, the GSK shot was given to more than 30 million people in 47 countries during the 2009-2010 H1N1 swine flu pandemic. Because it contains an adjuvant, or booster, it was not used in the United States because drug regulators there are wary of adjuvanted vaccines.

...

The FDA is frequently criticized for being too strict but it seems like American kids dodged a bullet this time.

I'd love to see a longer timeline but anything I search is obama spammed.

I'd wager it being because Democrats always considered themselves the working man's party. But you won't get much statistics before that, considering Jim Crow laws were still in effect, keeping black people from voting.

Originally Posted by oblivionx

So if there is a provision for socializing medicine in some way you're wearing the tinfoil hat?

If the provision says what you insinuated, yes. You insinuated they added a clause that would socialize medicine if exchanges failed. Socialized medicine is defined as government owning the means of production, which means hospitals become government owned and operated, and doctors become government employees.

That you apparently rate the continued accumulation of luxuries as a "right" that would surpass giving aid to someone in need is what I find disgusting about your argument.

If you have accumulated any luxuries at all (and sitting on your ass browsing a forum is a luxury), then you are no less disgusting.

---------- Post added 2013-02-01 at 07:08 AM ----------

Originally Posted by araine

Dont blame Obamacare for the failures of for profit GREED medicine system a la USA. True public healthcare and you pay like 30 dollars co pay for a hospital stay that would cost you 5000 dollars in the USA

And someone else picks up the difference. A combination of other taxpayers and the lesser paid healthcare workers.

My vet hospital is already cutting full time employees' hours. Now everybody is begging for more hours.

Thanks Obama

I'd quit if I were you. Employers were never, and have never been, required to provide health insurance to their employees. The fact that they're making you pay for avoidance of costs that they never had to incur in the first place, is appalling.

Dont blame Obamacare for the failures of for profit GREED medicine system a la USA. True public healthcare and you pay like 30 dollars co pay for a hospital stay that would cost you 5000 dollars in the USA